Liberalism is a really broad family of conflicting political and moral philosophies, and it’s really just the capitalist with minimal regulation bit that’s consistently there in all the branches. Most of the time, people are only dealing with different branches of liberalism, and depending on the local politics, there might only be one major political party in a country calling themselves the liberals.

Generally, leftists will talk about liberals and liberalism a lot because they’re living under some branch of liberalism, and they disagree to some extent with every branch of liberalism. Socialism, Communism and Anarchism are not Liberalism (and if you want to upset tankies and say it’s distinct from communism or upset other leftists and say it’s leftist Marxism-Leninism is not liberalism, too). Fascism and Conservatism are also not liberalism, but they’re not leftist, either, and to confuse things, lots of political parties calling themselves conservative around the world only want things that fit a definition of liberalism.

I mentioned anarchism and what anarchists think in the previous post because you replied to a post with a screenshot where an anarchist mentioned libs and seemed to think it was ambiguous what he meant, when it’s deducible from the fact that he’s an anarchist.

They don’t take all of it, so if they’re doing what they’re supposed to, nearly all the crabs will be returned to the ocean within a few days and eventually be fine again. Some do die, though, and even if they don’t, they’re worse for wear after the process, and some companies have been accused of taking all the blood and then selling the dead crabs as fishing bait. There’s an artificial alternative available, but regulators aren’t all convinced it’s as effective, so it isn’t used universally yet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_crab#Use_in_medicine

It’s the outside-the-US meaning that anarchists would typically use, and the US-centric definition is effectively a subset of the general definition when viewed from a leftist perspective, as they’re both capitalist with minimal regulation, just in the US it’s got the added connotations of being less homophobic and racist etc. then the centre of the Overton window, whereas classic liberalism isn’t incompatible with racism and homophobia etc…

Lots of people self-diagnose as coeliac because they know they have real symptoms from eating wheat, and there are a lot of people who claim to be gluten intolerant because they’re on a fad diet rather than because they actually have symptoms. That means that there’s an impression that non-coeliac gluten intolerance isn’t real, so some people who have it know they’ve got a real condition, so assume they have the thing no one’s claiming is fake.

While he’s pretty capable of being polite, if you say something he disagrees with and then defend yourself when he replies, you’ll be met with a lot of circular logic and claims that you’d agree with him if you read theory (with the linked theory always being something so long that you’d never read the whole thing unless you started off mostly agreeing with it and there being obviously dumb things right from the outset, so no one who could recognise a basic fallacy could agree with it). When he’s politely arguing for evil things using flawed logic, the politeness stops being the important part.

There’s no point retaliating once you’re dead unless the enemy knows it’s something you might do. You also can’t make a plain A-bomb arbitrarily big as you need the fuel to be small enough to be subcritical until it’s assembled, and simple enough to assemble that it spends so little time critical but not supercritical that a random decay doesn’t cause a chain reaction to start before the mass is fully compressed. If it starts too early, there’s enough energy to blow the bomb apart, which stops the reaction continuing. The more material you add, the more often random decays happen, and the likelier it becomes that the reaction starts prematurely. The theoretical limit is somewhere between 500kT and 1MT, which isn’t very much for a city buster, especially if you’ve buried it. You’d have to use more than one, but a pure fission bomb is very senstive to nearby nuclear detonations, so only the first one would be likely to work.

You’ve linked an article about a tank with an anti-drone cage being defeated, so even if it does point out that there are situations where a shaped charge can be made to work on a drone, it doesn’t support the original claim that shaped charges can be protected against by a small anti-drone cage.

That only debunks it if Lucas spent a lot of time thinking about Dutch and if Luke Skywalker is the only person who ever had a father.

This has the slight problems that:

• The UK’s now trying to make VPNs illegal, and was obviously going to because of the obvious flaws in the Online Safety Act.
• They consulted with MindGeek about the law before passing it, and they own most of the sites with a route to remain viable businesses under the current law, and several agree verification services, so they’re a much better company to blame for this.

Armour piercing shaped charges are more sensitive to the direction they hit at than to the distance, so they’re unsuitable for use on drones because you’re rarely, if ever, going to line them up just right, and armour piercing squash head munitions need to be going fast enough that they squash against the armour they’re trying to pierce before detonation, so need to be carried by something much faster than a drone. Suicide drones just have a lump of explosive as heavy as they can carry, and being 30cm further away from a simple explosion rarely stops it ruining your day.

Modern nukes contain a subcritical mass of fissile material and require an injection of tritium to arm them, and also require tritium for their second stage to get most of their rated yield. Tritium doesn’t last very long, so needs regularly topping up. If you’ve secretly buried a nuke, you’ll have to dig it up pretty often, undermining the advantages of secret burial. There’s also not much point in having a better nuclear deterrent than your enemy knows about, as the goal is to make them know you can destroy them so they’re too scared to attack you rather than to actually destroy them.

That was mainly when Russian equipment was getting mesh fitted directly to its outside instead of cheap netting being placed over roads. If you fit an anti-drone cage to something, it only moves the explosion about a foot further away, which often isn’t enough to make a meaningful difference to survivability. If you make the cage bigger, your vehicle stops fitting though gaps, so that’s not practical. Covering a road can keep the explosion metres away, though, and protects everything using the road rather than just the one vehicle.

TOML’s design is based on the idea that INI was a good format. This was always going to cause problems, as INI was never good, and never a format. In reality, it was hundreds of different formats people decided to use the same file extension for, all with their own incompatible quirks and rarely any ability to identify which variant you were using and therefore which quirks would need to be worked around.

The changes in the third panel were inevitable, as people have data with nested structure that they’re going to want to represent, and without significant whitespace, TOML was always going to need some kind of character to delimit nesting.

It’s not like longer-term thinking and more diverse investment is going to discover us an element that’s lighter than lithium and solid at room temperature and pressure, so anything that beats lithium-based chemistries at power to weight ratio, which is the most important factor for most applications, is going to come completely out of left field and likely not really be a chemical battery at all. Thinking ten years ahead won’t get us a phone-sized fusion reactor in ten years, and anything less sci-fi that might power a phone or a car and not be a downgrade over what’s available right now is going to be a tweak to existing lithium-based batteries. There are lots of tweaks to lithium-based batteries in the works, and lots that are now available in commercial products after huge amounts of money have been sunk into research. We’re already using the theoretically optimal material, so the only ways left to improve it are tweaks, and those tweaks are happening.

It’s not that you’re wrong in general, you just picked on one of the few industries where it’s not particularly applicable.

They’re niche right now, but it was always expected that they’d temporarily be niche for low-temperature applications while production scaled up enough to bring the price down. Once the price gets below lithium batteries, they should become the dominant batteries for grid storage, and grid storage is likely to one one of, if not the biggest, markets for batteries.

That’s kind of a myth put out to calm the public when H-bombs were new. They have a fusion stage, and fusion doesn’t produce fallout, but the fusion isn’t solely a source of energy, it’s also a source of neutrons to fission an un-enriched uranium tamper that surrounds the warhead, and fissioning uranium produces fallout.

You might be thinking of the Soviet Tsar Bomba test, which was the largest thermonuclear explosion in history, and produced minimal fallout, but wasn’t actually the whole bomb as designed. The tamper was replaced with lead for the test (there’s no point covering a wide area in fallout if you don’t know whether the rest of the bomb works yet), so the output was about half what it would have been otherwise (which balanced out the fact that the bomb was about twice as powerful as expected).

Every country with thermonuclear weapons has a fissionable tamper on them. There’s not much point making your nukes half as scary as they could be for the same money. No one’s expecting to invade anywhere they’ve just nuked or to be around to have to deal with the humanitarian crisis afterwards.

For plenty of industries, that kind of thing is true, but there are loads of manufacturers of batteries so forming a cartel and agreeing not to bother with any new technologies is impractical, and buying out new competitors with new technology and stifling it only works if your competitors also stifle everything new that they buy. There are a bunch of nation states backing their domestic battery producers and desperate for any way for them to outcompete those of other countries, and cartels tend not to form between state-backed companies from geopolitical rivals.

The big thing stopping new technology appearing is that we’re pretty good at making lithium-based batteries, so you generally end up with a better battery for less R&D effort by making a small improvement to lithium batteries than coming up with something new, even if the theoretical limits for the new thing would blow modern batteries out the water. Sodium batteries have the advantage that lots of the knowledge that applies to lithium batteries is still useful, so the road from theoretical to good is much shorter, and we’re already using all the lithium we can extract and that’s representing a large fraction of a battery’s cost, so there’s a market for something cheaper even if it’s worse.

They’re now commercially available as a more expensive, heavier alternative to lithium batteries with the advantage that they tolerate low temperatures better. They’re expected to stay heavier (so be a bad fit for cars except in very cold places) but get cheaper than lithium ones (so be a good fit for things that don’t move much).

CV padding and main character syndrome.

You can get loads of frames per second with cloud gaming, just not necessarily from the right second.